Would you re-sign Pau for ~7 million per?

^Well at this point of his career he's even less of a banger, and that may be a good thing as far as prolonging his career. He's a skilled player, and being a little lighter on his feet certainly wouldnt be a bad thing. He can become leaner without losing strength.

"Come hell or high water we're gonna be there again. Its just something about the Lakers organization. Mitch is really, really good at it, he's really really good man...."

I don't think Pau should be any leaner; he's a pretty tiny dude for a seven footer. His athleticism is pretty poor, too. I don't understand why someone wouldn't look to add muscle and explosiveness, even at his age, as a pro Center.

Pau's never been a "strength" guy.... and you don't suddenly change into one at his age. He is what he is at this point.

His conditioning has been good to great IMO for a big. His issues revolve around that fact that he has a high center of gravity and has little upper body strength. That has only become more apparent as he slows down. Quickness and speed at his position was his advantage and now that isn't there at the same delta as before. That's age related.

"If the past sits in judgment on the present, the future will be lost." Winston Churchill

“The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present - and is gravely to be regarded."Dwight Eisenhower

"Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it"Thomas Sowell

BasketballRic Bucher + TrustLast note on Lakers for now: Tom Penn, NBA cap guru, said on my radio show that as constituted, they could face aluxury tax hit of as much as $85 million next season. Even with that humonguous TV deal, it's hard to imagine them paying that on top of the $90-some million due for player payroll. One option, I'm told, is to amnesty Pau Gasol and the $19 million he has coming next season. It sounds crazy, but if they can't deal Gasol -- and he still would appear to be the most tradeable commodity -- for draft picks or anything that brings a lot less than $19 million in salaries back, they're on the hook for 1 1/2 times his salary and more thanks to the repeater tax. I have to check back with Penn, but I would think if taking Gasol's money off the cap and making another small move gets them under the luxury tax, the $85 million goes away. So maybe you can look at it as a move that gives away Gasol for nothing. Or, just possibly, you can look at it as keeping $85 million in the Lakers' pocket. about a minute ago

Rule of Thumb at ClubLakers - Never encourage people to check your post history.

^ its the ugly truth. Pau is most likely not returning next year but how will his exit be...via amnesty or trade. Would teams take achance on him and acquire his $19 mil during the draft. $19 mil is a huge expiring what if he finds his game again and gets traded to a contender? Lots of questions to be answered by the Lakers FO regarding Pau

Amnesty for Pau has to be on the table. Only 3 other candidates for amnesty: Kobe, Blake and MWP. Kobe's not happening; Blake and MWP don't have the amnesty bang for the buck that Pau does. But I can see a scenario where trading Pau brings back less salary and they combine that with amnestying Blake or MWP, and that gets the team close to the same effect of dumping Pau into amnesty. Except that they won't have to pay Pau at all. That might be the ideal outcome.

Of Blake and MWP, I think MWP brings more amnesty bang for the buck, but Blake is the more expendable (at the moment). I think under these circumstances that Clark is gone too unless he takes less money to stay. Jordan Hill money, no better than that. Someone offers him MLE, Lakers will not match that.

I think only way Pau stays next year is if he and D12 somehow find the chemistry together and they make it to the Finals. Pigs fly, I know...

I shall be telling this with a sigh Somewhere ages and ages hence:Two roads diverged in a wood, and I--I took the one less traveled by,And that has made all the difference.

This is an anti Laker CBA, it was made to screw us with no exceptions... Rewarding incompetence and punishing excellent management. The trade for Paul was the perfect example... The Lakers FO then knew that Pau was done. They knew that all he wanted from then on was cash his Laker checks and play hard for Spain. Why would they pay 85mil extra for that BS.

Steve Kyler ‏@stevekylerNBART @eddieboy16: Do you think the Lakers will try again to trade Pau next season? ---> Yes, around the draft and free agency.

That's the latest I heard, but it shares the same sentiment as Bucher in that Pau is going to be moved one way or another. I would prefer trading him considering the package and hopefully getting something back that can balance our roster out. Nevertheless, if you can't get nothing for him and need the financial flexibility, amnesty him.

We should never expand any player, Pau game started to disappear just after he got his new contract. Same with Luke and Sasha. I'm joking about not expanding any player, but look at our history on re-signing players and tell how many of them were success ?

earvinfr wrote:We should never expand any player, Pau game started to disappear just after he got his new contract. Same with Luke and Sasha. I'm joking about not expanding any player, but look at our history on re-signing players and tell how many of them were success ?

earvinfr wrote:We should never expand any player, Pau game started to disappear just after he got his new contract. Same with Luke and Sasha. I'm joking about not expanding any player, but look at our history on re-signing players and tell how many of them were success ?

Kobe and Lamar!

But seriously Luke, Sasha, Pau were all paid based on their contributions at the time of the extensions given, they worked hard, they were strong contributors...the Sasha and Pau contracts were understandable but Luke's was just head scratching...6 years wow lol

I really hated the Sasha trade to New Jersey, he was an expiring contract and we gave up our 2011 1st round pick to get Joe Smith who never played. I have no idea why Mitch did that trade

The one thing that's not on that list: his personality and the person that he is. I love Pau and I wish all that CP3 fiasco never happened because it really facilitated his decline. Not only did we not get one of, if not the, best point guards in the game, but two of our best 3 bigs took a huge mental hit. It's been part of what's killed our chemistry for 3 seasons.

Wherever Pau ends up, they'll be getting a great player and a great person.

But the season isn't over and Pau still has a huge part to play for us in LA.

Mark Medina of the LA Daily News wrote:For the first time since tearing the plantar fascia of his right foot four weeks ago, Lakers forward Pau Gasol received medical clearance Thursday to participate in running drills.

“Discomfort was minimal,” Gasol said on Twitcam. “Very encouraging.”

Gasol traveled with the Lakers’ on their two-game trip to Oklahoma City (Tuesday) and New Orleans (Wednesday) and spent that time working with strength and conditioning coach Tim DiFrancesco on exercises that test his gluteal and neuro muscles. Gasol has missed the past 13 games and is expected to stay sidelined for at least another two to four weeks.

You might HAVE to amnesty him if the luxury tax hit is that high and we're not winning a championship to justify it. Still, I'd like to see him traded for much needed pieces before just cutting him loose, as mentioned a 19 mil expiring is huge and could get some good players.

Weezy wrote:You might HAVE to amnesty him if the luxury tax hit is that high and we're not winning a championship to justify it. Still, I'd like to see him traded for much needed pieces before just cutting him loose, as mentioned a 19 mil expiring is huge and could get some good players.

Mitch doesn't have to try that hard to find a package of some young talent for Pau if that's the direction we go in. We're not going to waste the amnesty on him. Especially since he's not just expiring, but he's a talented player with Championship experience.

Metta would be the most difficult to move in my opinion, and would be the primary target for amnesty should we choose to use it.

Weezy wrote:You might HAVE to amnesty him if the luxury tax hit is that high and we're not winning a championship to justify it. Still, I'd like to see him traded for much needed pieces before just cutting him loose, as mentioned a 19 mil expiring is huge and could get some good players.

Mitch doesn't have to try that hard to find a package of some young talent for Pau if that's the direction we go in. We're not going to waste the amnesty on him. Especially since he's not just expiring, but he's a talented player with Championship experience.

Metta would be the most difficult to move in my opinion, and would be the primary target for amnesty should we choose to use it.

Only reason I say we might have to is because, and forgive me because I'm not that knowledgeable on the salary cap and luxury tax rules, if we trade Pau the players coming back will be making most of what he's making combined. So won't that STILL put us way up there in the huge penalty zone for luxury tax? Yes, Pau's 19 mil contract will be gone, but if we get 3 or 4 guys for him that add up to that much isn't it the same thing, in that our roster is still extremely pricey? Whereas if he's amnestied that money is just gone, off the books, getting us back down to respectable luxury tax levels for now? If we do trade him I have no doubt Mitch can get great pieces for him, if he turned Kwame's expiring into Pau he can certainly turn Pau's expiring into quality players.

You're right, but we don't actually have to take back that much salary if we trade him to a team with cap room. We might not be able to afford it, but some team will be able to. We could trade him to say Detroit and take back nothing. Or trade him to Charlotte and take back maybe 5-10 million. Nine million off the books goes a long way. Especially if you amnesty Peace. Then you're looking at 17 million off the books and missing most of that tax threshold.